Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Are optically-selected QSO catalogs biased ?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv astro-ph/9707153 v1 pith:YO3LQZPB submitted 1997-07-14 astro-ph

Are optically-selected QSO catalogs biased ?

classification astro-ph
keywords qsosanticorrelationcfhtgalaxiesgalaxyhighredshiftsurvey
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

A thorough study of QSO-galaxy correlations has been done on a region close to the North Galactic Pole using a complete subsample of the optically selected CFHT/MMT QSO survey and the galaxy catalog of Odewahn and Aldering (1995). Although a positive correlation between bright QSOs and galaxies is expected because of the magnification bias effect, none is detected. On the contrary, there is a significant (>99.6%) anticorrelation between z<1.6 QSOs and red galaxies on rather large angular distances. This anticorrelation is much less pronounced for high redshift z>1.6 QSOs, which seems to exclude dust as a cause of the QSO underdensity. This result suggests that the selection process employed in the CFHT/MMT QSO survey is losing up to 50% of low redshift z<1.6 QSOs in regions of high galaxy density. The incompleteness in the whole z<1.6 QSO sample may reach 10% and have important consequences in the estimation of QSO evolution and the QSO autocorrelation function.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.